Well, I believe that,
that glyphosate
causes cancer.
I believe that
masks,
that there's no.
It starts with a simple question
and ends in objective reality. Reality.
Through our journey from there to here,
we find one another
and ourselves.
And as the next twenty four hours
breaks free from our last,
we gaze onward in reflection of the day.
Help your own push. Help your own push.
Plan to stay afloat.
Welcome to the daily wrap up.
Friday, 02/20/2026.
Thank you for joining me today.
Another unfortunate day in the Maha well, you
know, in in the the health of this
country.
Very frustrating. Even for those of us that
are constantly calling it out left or right,
Biden or Trump, just the, you know, the
lies being put forward by our government, by
the partisanship,
it's still disappointing.
Yeah. I I've been talking about glyphosate and
the issues around that in a lot of
different ways, pretty much my entire career doing
this. And it's been
one of the most obvious parts in I
mean, in general, there's been study after study
after study, but specifically in the pesticide conversation
or the, you know, agricultural, it it's been
so
unbelievably
demonstrated to be a danger.
And so you just kinda have hope. Like,
may I was hoping that maybe Donald Trump
would
use that to throw a bone, and I'll
take it. I'll take the positive step even
if it's to pacify his audience, and here
we are. So if you haven't seen, Donald
Trump has made glyphosate
a national security imperative.
And it just doesn't it it just seems
like it can't go far enough for people
to stop, well, for some people to stop
supporting this person. And I'm I still have
not even moved away from the possibility that
this is something that's beyond his control.
You know? I I I in fact, I
think that's far more logical than anything else
we're watching. I don't think it's even in
him to continually do,
you know, in a in a in a
reputational
sense what he keeps doing to himself. In
any case,
the the glyphosate conversation is very important because
it connects with a lot of different factors
in the health
and, I mean, we're gonna get into even
the geopolitical conversation in regard to using it
as a weapon.
But the reality of this, an endocrine disrupting
chemical conversation, the you know, dealing with the
trans conversation or any other elements within that,
or just generally the
ubiquitous nature of what it has become and
what that means for your health.
Or having RFK Jr tell you that it's
dangerous or his his previous vice president running,
you know, the his running mate also say
any any number of people that were being
put forward as Maha now, you know,
bottom line being contradicted by what Trump is
doing. So it's it's sort of a a
moment of of
you know, it's a decision to be made.
If you understand how dangerous this is and
you believe it's important to stop, like, pretty
much anybody, again, in the Maha movement, meaning
people who genuinely wanna make America healthy again,
not the politicians pretending to be Maha, it's
important to frame it that way. The Maha
movement in my mind are the people that
actually believe that, not the politicians and fake,
partisan grifters who leaned into that to get
you to support them. So in a in
a in a way, you have people who
are covering this accurately but sort of, like,
calling the Maha movement dishonest. That's That's not
I don't think that's the right way to
frame that, if you get what I'm saying.
But we're gonna talk about primarily glyphosate and
how important that is and
clear
and go through the studies and stuff that
we've covered a lot, but I'm gonna go
through some of the important ones again so
you guys can see those. And use them
as it's sort of like the COVID nineteen
conversation. Right? When it all started, you had
all these partisans and, you know, from both
sides, because remember, Trump told you it was
a good thing, trying to argue that this
was somehow positive. And, you know, we were
right there with the science going, well, that's
not what it shows you. You're not not
I'm not an expert, but here's what it
is showing you. That's not what they're saying.
Things like that were very clear. And even
then, you could have argued it was not
necessarily bad for you, but you could have
still been like, yeah, but he's lying about
that, or that's not accurate.
That's where we are again and have been
for a very long time with everything we
discussed. But if you're for the first time
hearing about this, the evidence is here if
you wanna look. They know it's dangerous. Their
own studies have shown it's dangerous. They've been
caught lying about their studies to cover up
that it's dangerous. There's been examples where, the
for example, left and right governments have been
caught paying or rather, you know, paying to
manipulate studies, but also were you basically using
mon Monsanto's own study to justify why it's
safe when everybody else said it's dangerous, including
their own work. It's a cover up like
a lot of other things. I mean, you
know my mind, how my mind works if
you watch this show. I always wanna go
into all the connected points. And I have
some to connect to today, but I'm trying
to stay focused on this one. But, you
know, dioxins and you know, this is a
fraction of a very real,
gigantic, almost insurmountable problem because it's so
ubiquitous is the right word for it. Glyphosate
is such a perfect example. The question is,
has it been made this way so it's
impossible to deal with even just that alone
just because they wanna make money and they
they realize if they make it everywhere, there's
no way you can really ever deal with
it or claim that it was their fault?
Or is it being made ubiquitous for some
reason on top of that, and that's the
way they make sure it never goes away?
You know, there's all these ways to think
about it, but the one thing you can't
really decide I mean, based on the evidence,
is that they're doing this because they believe
it's good for you or that it's healthy
for you or that they're not you know,
that it
is that they're just being dishonest about how
this is being applied. I don't even understand
why they would argue this is a national
security issue when what they're really doing is
saying because we forced you to be reliant
on this, now it's become a national security.
Well, yeah. So you're basically bidding you did
this to us. But anyway, I digress. We're
gonna get into all this today. I'm also
gonna talk about,
a brief point about the tariff discussion just
so that it's relevant to what's going on
and and in a distractionary sense as well,
but also a quick point about the Board
of Peace. Just to start. Really quick, actually.
And then the entire part today is about
about glyphosate because we have been covering this
for a long time. I mean, as the
independent media, and I'm actually like I said,
to start there, I'm just I'm actually really
shocked of all the things that this would
be the the the the direction. You know,
they they know this is gonna be an
important point for Maha, so why would he
do it? Again, I don't know. I think
that shows you that this is not him
or his you know, I don't think they're
making decisions like we think they are to
make it as objective as possible.
Why I mean, you could have done this,
for example, with glyphosate in a much more
you know, a less bombastic way, something quieter,
something that wasn't, you know, but it's
calling attention to it.
I tend to think that's because somebody else
wants that. Keep that in your mind as
we go through the entire show today. Now
starting with a couple quick points about the
board of peace that I didn't want you
to miss.
Just, as always, it's just my root. I
I tend to include some of these.
There's probably seven or eight articles that are
shows rather that I think are really good
around this main point, the whether it's globalism
or or the point of the technocracy.
And I tend to include some here and
there, but I'll include these today because the
point you're gonna hear about the board of
peace is an extension of what we've been
telling you. And now you're paying for it
like we told you you would despite all
of the mainstream alternative grifters out there screaming
that wasn't the possibility.
The fake globalist resistance ushering in the globalist
plan, it's a perfect way to understand what
I think we're seeing. That's a good show
we did on that as well as one
that I discussed, the bigger picture of the
Trump and the Zionist globalist technocrats are building
your new society, whether it's a network state
discussion or just anything else we're talking about,
the great reset, which is happening and is
being driven forward by all sides of this
government. It's whether you like it or not,
but also the point that ties to today,
which is connected.
As Trump goes to Davos and they say
globalism is dead and then literally outlines his
globalist agenda, which is not my opinion, guys.
This is a globalist by the definition of
the word
plan.
Trump's board of peace,
which is not national it's all it's not
just The United States. It is a globalist,
but it is a new UN dynamic. That's
what it is. So if you're being honest
dishonest about that, man, I wasn't started like
that. But if you're doing it like that,
you're being dishonest. At the end of the
day, you can't call this anything but globalist.
You can and and not even maybe you
don't even disagree with that. Just being honest
about the terms. Gaza's board of peace seeks
to reimagine the international order, and this is
ultimately the point. So based on this,
especially with the point of, you know, lowering
costs and making America first. So at this
point now,
on top of everything
well, and and for and before I go
past it, I'm trying to make it quick.
For those who don't know the conversation, let's
not forget that this is about Gaza. Right?
This is the ongoing genocide and the idea
that you're creating a new society on top
of the bones of people you claimed you
were trying to save and acting like this
in any way will involve Palestinians. If you
actually care to look, not what he says
or what Yahoo says or what the ridiculous
media or mainstream alternative says, but just look
at their own documentation,
there's no part of this for the Palestinians.
And in fact, right now, they're claiming the
Palestinians are the reason, like, everything's not working.
It's insane what we're watching. But on top
of that, the reality of the genocide, what
they're doing to these people, and how everything
we always told you was going to happen
and they
they yelled wasn't gonna happen is now literally
happening. They're making you pay for it, which
again, for the third time, we told you
it was gonna happen because it was pretty
clear that this was going to involve The
United States and that Israel, of course, was
gonna make somebody else foot the bill for
their genocide.
$10,000,000,000
of US taxpayer dollars for the border peace.
As and it right now, you have people,
even under this post, by the way, going,
that's not true. It's gonna be donated, and
it's gonna be completely paid for by other
countries
without even realizing that Trump's saying this to
you. I I wanna let you know that
The United States is going to make a
contribution of $10,000,000,000
to the Board of Peace.
Thank you.
And we've had great support for that
number. And that number is a very small
number when you look at,
that compared to the cost of war.
Yeah. Yeah. Well, when you compare it to
your genocide, it's easy to do that. Well,
both are bad, Trump. How about that? Both
sides are bad. That's,
that's two weeks of fighting.
It's a very small number. It sounds like
a lot, but it's a very small number.
So we're committed to $10,000,000,000.
Together, we can achieve the
Okay.
So if you're if you're confused, that means
you're paying for that. Now in in some
abstract way, you could try to warp this
into some you know? Bottom line, the if
the US government is spending money, you're paying
for that. Yes. It may not amount to
exactly that from exact but at the end
of the day, that's where this money comes
from, and that's what is going to happen.
Not other country, but it that's the money
he's pointing to. Now there's other money that
I guarantee is gonna flow through this project
because all of them are enriching themselves off
of this genocide.
And And let's be clear as well. If
you don't know this by now, maybe if
you, you know, get sucked into the partisan
game, which we all do time to time,
if you're if you're doing this. I, myself,
fall, you know, into it even as I
know it's not the majority. It's pretty clear
that the majority of Americans based on I
mean, you can even listen to Tucker Carlson
will tell you this if that makes any
difference for you. The majority of Americans see
this, guys, left and right. This is not
okay. They don't agree with this. They see
the genocide. It's being called out. That's the
same metric for the damn everywhere in the
world right now.
I mean, it's one of those crazy points
where I keep in the beginning, that was
my opinion. Remember when I was like, you
know, it seems like everybody sees this. I
mean, aside from the fact that it was
obvious, and it's the same point you could
make about the ice point and plenty of
others, and it's the same thing. The truth
is when you really dive into it, it's
pretty it's obvious that even people that don't
like you know, have a partisan side, if
they're honest, can still recognize that's not what
you're looking at. And this was clear from
the very early on point in this conversation.
$10,000,000,000.
Now here's another clip, and this is the
same point. This this goes to the Gaza
technocracy side of it, which again, how crazy
it is to me that this stuff can
be so prevalent in the conversation. And yet
right over here, like, a hair's breath away,
you're over here going, technocracy bad, and we
have to stop the great reset, and Democrats
are doing this in Dallas. And they're doing
it right in front of you, right there,
building it out. Digital money, digital control structure.
It is exactly what we're talking about. And
even crazier, the Peter Teals of the world
and Marc Andreessen, they're the ones funding this
larger project in regards to the globe the
the per the Freedom City network state dynamic,
and they're involved in this project. Say and
funding as well, by the way. That's what
the bigger point is. The Freedom City, Technocracy,
Network State, Gaza, it is the same conversation
in principle, like in what rather in,
practice, what they're doing, what they're building, the
idea. And that has to be terrifying with
what we're watching them do and how everyone's
enriching themselves off of this practice or project.
Excuse me. So here is Muhammad Shehada pointing
out something they just recently said, drop site
news actually posting it, about what Gaza will
be. Now you don't need to hear this
for the third the other than this actual
people still question that this is genuine. It
is, and it's easy to prove, but the
actual plan that they released.
But to hear it from the horse's mouth
as it were, that's what they're doing right
here.
When we asked, the NCAD
what Gaza needs to unlock its potential,
the answer was clear.
Reconnect Gaza to the world digitally
and economically.
Yeah. Well, which was the case until Israel
stopped that. Now there's always gonna be those
screeching people with nothing to back it up
that yell that's not true or that it
is because they hate Jews. It's just not
true, guys. And you can prove it if
you actually care. I'm just exhausting having to
always push back the the minority of people
screaming and that people back away from because
they don't wanna be called racist. The truth,
though, is just like with Christians in Gaza,
they were removed and forced out by Israel.
It's actually easy to prove. So too are
the origin points of this conversation. It's built
into this. So if you're saying to reconnect
them, well, yeah, there was an easy answer
to that. Israel is the one stopping that.
You know, the answer is not genocide them
into nothing and then pretend that we're saving
them by letting Israel control the area and
calling it Gaza or rather whatever they call
it next. And replace corruption
with an open tax free system. Oh, great.
Great. So whoever ends up living there, likely
the
extremist Jewish settler population that's already rolling into
Gaza that they just call the new Palestine,
they get to have a tax free world,
great, off the back of your taxes. I
mean, think about whatever you think is happening
and whatever you think whether you agree with
everything. You're over here paying taxes like crazy
so Israelis can have free health care and
free education and then build a new society
on the bones of a dead one that
they created of people they're murdering in real
time
and let them be tax free. Off your
time. You think about this. It's so insulting
that group of anybody, the conservatives are out
here thinking that this is America first, that
we're winning, it's all going in our direction.
I mean, it's just a it's a one
insult after another.
Gaza
was once a vital trade off between Asia
and Europe.
Reconnection
is a return to its roots.
Even the word gauze comes from Gaza, where
silk was woven and exported to Europe. Well,
that's good policy.
We brought together Palestinian,
Arab, and American partners to deliver practical solutions.
By July,
Gaza's two gs network will be upgraded
with free, high speed access to essential services.
Mhmm. The NCAG is building a secure digital
backbone, an open platform,
enabling e payments, financial services, e learning, and
healthcare with user control over data.
This effort is supported
by original partners,
and I believe you will hear some exciting
news from them on that later today.
In parallel,
we're advancing an Amazon like logistics system to
help us to launch I mean, this is
all freedom and liberty stuff. Right? This is
all this is exactly what everyone's calling for.
Right? Amazon, like, emulating the technocratic society, building
digital money and to tokenized everything and free
I mean, literally, nobody's calling for this other
than the insider elitist trying to make this
happen and claiming it's what we want.
Businesses
import globally and trade securely.
This will lower prices, drive growth,
and help transform Gaza into an open,
transparent,
corruption free economic zone. Thank you.
Yeah. And people for people making fun of
the guy. I I I don't know who
it is either, but it's probably just some
guy they got to read this, and so
they didn't have to be the ones explaining
why your technocratic future was being built for
you. But as Steve writes, this is the
exact same currency model The US wants for
Americans, same same with The UK, EU, Russia,
China, and every other nation we live on
planet Gaza.
Now
where this goes matters. Now it's too that's
not gonna just because it happens in Gaza,
therefore, it will happen everywhere else, but realize
that this is the same conversation.
All of this. Everything we told you, everything
that's building out. I mean, think of how
crazy it is that we can be talking
about this kind of thing happening.
And in the beginning, it was like, no.
We're just trying to get Hamas out of
the way. We're trying to save some people.
And then it literally ends up that not
only do they kill everybody and do everything
we told you they would, then they build
a technocratic city on top of it.
I mean, it's almost like they want you
to be it's like they want you to
see what they're doing. They're laughing at you.
We're gonna go ahead and build that technocratic
thing you all said was fake news right
on top of the genocide that we claim
isn't happening.
It's just it's just it's wild where we
are, but how it can be so obvious.
And this is I've said this a thousand
times. It's everything we're dealing with. That's the
post truth world. They've created this where they
know that they can just tell you the
facts and then just pretend that's not true
or just not do anything. And enough people,
not not even close to the majority, but
enough of them that just pretend like all
of you aren't doing anything,
well, I guess, pacify the rest.
Here's TrueStream Media. Interesting department of war propaganda
released on the same day Trump announces he's
taking $10,000,000,000 out of the US Treasury without
approval, by the way, from congress, because no
big deal. We don't care about anything other
than Trump saying things are good, and transferred
to the Board of Peace Slush Fund that
he created and made himself chairman for life
of let's not forget, for life.
For an international body. And takes money from
you, puts it into this lost fund that
you have no control over, and call that
anything other than I mean, that's theft. That's
that's crime. That's corruption.
But here's what they post right after that.
This is Department of War, CDO,
with this very weird, almost ominous looking, like,
horror looking picture of Trump. You can't win,
so don't try.
That's what the US government just posted on
Twitter.
Department of War. You can't win, so don't
try.
Now, sure, we could guess all day long.
He means Iran.
He means secretly Israel because save them for
last, or whatever ridiculous assumption is going on
on people that wanna pretend like this is
somehow positive.
Guys, I agree with the people. It's opinion,
like it all is.
I agree with people that are saying this
is aimed at all of us. Epstein files,
anything.
Don't even try anymore because they see that
people are starting to go, you know what?
This is what this is what I think
anyway. There's there's something off here. Biden, Trump,
government, the whole thing. The we can I'm
starting to feel a pattern here. We're not
that stupid. We can tell that we keep
getting gaslit and lied, and now
that people are finally going, how about we
just stop the whole game? They're they're just
trying to scare you back into place. That's
my personal opinion. You can't win, so don't
try. You know what? They don't post that
unless they know you can win. That's my
why would they even put that out there?
I think at the end of the day,
we are already winning, and that's why people
in power are worried.
But you can decide for yourself. Now on
the tariff point of this, which is another
interesting overlap,
different conversation but speaks to the the the
the real
yeah. You know, the contradiction of what we
claim we're fighting for in regard to the
constitution,
liberty, freedom, all the things they claim they're
trying to support. And, ultimately, what this amounts
to as Rand Paul and Massey and anybody
who's actually at least emulating, and I always
have to be objective because I'm not sure,
America first.
Honest right now, I I I believe that
they're both leaning into this direction. Though I
would argue that I don't know whether it's
opportunism or not. Just I'm a pessimist. Obviously,
when it comes to government, our history makes
us we should be looking at that way.
But I wanna I'll go ahead and add
right now. On the point of, like, the
opportunism I keep discussing, for those who don't
know what I mean by that, I think
that politicians today
are politicians in general are are just in
it they're in it for themselves. I think
we can see that by now. And so
we need to motivate them and give them
the the motivation
to lean into the truth, whether or not
they believe in it or care about it.
I mean, in a perfect world, we would
of course, they would believe in it. They'd
fight for it. I hope we have that.
But seeing as how we don't know for
sure and we never really will, we should
just hope that they at least acknowledge it
and and consistently
lean into the truth, or what we believe
is the truth and what's accurate. So my
point is, when Israel and currently our government
structure's out there lying to us every day
about everything, and you've got people, even dishonestly,
which is my gut, Marta Taylor Greene, so
on, I shouldn't say dishonestly, just not with
the best intention, come out and tell you
that unpopular truth. I go, yes. Thank God
that's the truth right there. I don't trust
the person, but I'm gonna hell I'm gonna
elevate that and show some of these newer
politicians, hey, wait a minute. Look at what
she just did right there. Look, she's got
10,000,000 views on that. Clearly, Americans want that,
and they know that. And so try to
show some of these new people who aren't
completely taken by Israel and lobbied into the
ground, maybe I can start using the truth
to benefit my career. Still profiteering,
still opportunism.
But if we can start motivating more of
them to do that, well then, what do
you know? Suddenly, it's in their interest to
promote the truth. It but it could profit
from doing that. See how that works? Now,
let's that shouldn't be the end game. We
should drive it to a place to where
it is. So but the point overall
is I think that's happening.
Here
and Rand Paul's kind of a bad example
because I think he's been pretty more than
most of them has been pretty consistent with
his principles and and his actions. But I've
seen plenty
I mean, I'm trying to think of a
good example, but numerous examples over the years
where I'm like, okay. He's playing the game.
He pulled that punch. He didn't bring this
up, and we know he knows that.
But that's politics for you.
I don't really I I don't I could
few and far between, maybe if I I
can't even remember examples of Ron Paul doing
that. I'm sure they're there, but last year.
But Massey lately has been knocking out of
the park.
Fair I mean, it doesn't say I mean
I trust him. In fact, the opposite. I'm
more I mean, more skeptical. But you can
see that he's been consistently doing what we
argue is actually what America first would look
like, what Republicans actually call for, and he's
getting a lot of support for it, but
a lot of hate and attacks and even
threats from the from the higher up level.
I think Ron Paul
is now starting more and more, at least
in my view, to do that.
Whether it's because he believes it, it was
probably the case, but I think also because
he's recognizing that this is what people are
gravitating towards, like, flocking towards. So all that
aside, I just wanna put that in there
too because I do think we should keep
doing that and not just go, oh, well,
I'm not gonna I'm gonna ignore that because
I don't like the guy saying it. You
know? I mean, we all do that time
to time, and sometimes it is important. But
anyway, so he says,
first, actually, Craig post this. You might have
already seen this going around. Supreme Court has
now ruled
six to three that Donald Trump does not
have the legal authority to impose global tariffs.
He doesn't, by the way, under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act. Remember, I mean, I
said this right in the beginning of this
tariff conversation. On top of the fact that
there's simply taxes on you at the end
of the day. It's very simple to understand,
actually, other outside of all the ways they
try to complicate it. At the end of
the day, what does it amount to? It's
pretty simple.
Chief justice Roberts wrote for the majority.
The IE EPA, that's the,
International
Emergency Economics Powers Act.
It does not authorize the president to impose
tariffs.
Okay. So that's this is causing everybody to
lose their minds. Oh, un American. Oh, the
court hates everybody. Let's not forget. It's I
I think it's majority actually Republicans.
Or at the very least, it's more, I
forget the number. Give me the chat what
the breakdown was in the Supreme Court again.
Again, technically, they're not they don't even, like,
publicize their their side, but it's they you
usually go on who appoints them, and I
think typically it's I I thought it was
more than half. But anyway, let me know
in the chat if you remember what the
breakdown was. But the point is there's republicans
on the supreme court, so it's not just
one side versus the other. And it's six
to three, so it shows you that there
were,
Republicans that that supported this. Now the real
point is that this is the reality. Like,
you can disagree with it. You can even
argue that this should have happened because it'll
save America. May I I disagree, but you
could argue that. But what you can't argue
is that this was legal or constitutional because
it was not in what he was doing
originally. As Rand wrote again, he said this
in the beginning. In defense of our republic,
the Supreme Court struck down using emergency powers
to enact taxes. Now not necessarily that Trump
doesn't have influence or power involved in that
conversation, but using
emergency powers
to enact taxes.
I mean, you could even get into the
conversation of executive order, quite frankly, because it's
a different conversation. But the point is that
the way that this has all been going
has been ruled by dictate from the powers
from one person. As I've been saying for
years, that is not what we pretend we
are. It's it's not. This ruling will also
prevent a future president.
Obviously, this is the important part to make
for people to think that somehow Trump will
do it even though it's wrong and it'll
still work out for everybody.
This this new ruling will stop people like
potentially AOC's presidency or whatever the next Democrat
presidency will be
from having emergency powers to enact, fill in
the blank,
socialism, he writes.
See?
It's amazing we can't think that through. Like,
what are we gonna pretend that somehow they'll
never end up in that position again if
you believe that's what they would do even
though it's not as simple as saying, are
you not socialism?
He's but he's using it to make a
point. So this is a republican and argue
a one with a much better track record
than most of the rest of them screaming
America first. Now this guy, who I'm not
even familiar with, like, who he is or
what he does, but he's prominent, you know,
in I've seen him commenting on all the
things. He's very partisan clearly, almost 150, 60
160,000
followers.
Christian nationalism, he says in his in his
bio.
And he says underneath Rand Paul, you disingenuous
c u c k. It's being done right
now
to protect the Republic from the fascist
that you and your other Republicans are too,
you know, c u c ked to stand
up against. Okay. Your father should be ashamed
of you, Rippa. Okay. Well, wait a minute.
So he he's saying it's being done right
now, meaning Trump's I mean, if I take
it correctly, Trump's
tariffs.
So you're saying that that is is he
he's
doing something that we can clearly show by
Supreme Court or otherwise is not actually allowed
to stop them. Okay. Well, fine. That's my
point. Maybe you agree with that, but you
have to acknowledge that you're doing the wrong
thing
to
counteract
the wrong thing, I guess. And all that
does is enshrine forever that the presidents can
teeter totter back and forth doing the wrong
thing.
Right? I mean, how do you not recognize
that, pastor Ben? How do you not recognize
like, only way that would make sense is
if you think that this move will end
in a way that means they'll never be
able to have power over this again, which
is what they all secretly think. That there'll
be Republicans and Trump forever.
It's childish.
And and if it's genuine what you think
or even possible, well, that would be unconstitutional.
See, they don't seem to care about most
of these things. This person just made fun
of him by posting whatever that is. It
but it's it's frustrating, is it not?
Now I'm not you could even if you
agree with him, you have to acknowledge
that this ultimately should be anything that we're
doing should be done the legal way, the
constitutional way. Otherwise, all you do is continue
to undermine the founding documents that we all
pretend we're fighting for.
Simple.
Thomas Massie points to another Republican and says,
some have asked me to comment on the
Supreme Court ruling striking down tariffs based on
emergency declaration by the executive. That's all it's
really about. Why should I comment when Gorsuch
has already nailed it right here? Here's what
he says. For those who think it is
important and I really this needs to be
heard by you can disagree, mind you, obviously.
But for those that believe this is a
left versus right discussion, it's not. You're getting
that from the Alex Jones, Nick Sorter types
of the world because they're desperate to keep
you both distracted, divided, and unaware that they're
ridiculous today. For those who think it is
important to for the nation to impose more
more tariffs.
He says, I understand that today's decision will
be disappointing.
All I can offer them is that that
that most major decisions affecting the rights and
responsibilities of American people, including the duty to
pay taxes and tariffs, are funneled through the
legislative process for a reason. And, yes, legislating
can be hard and take time. And, yes,
it can be tempting to bypass Congress when
some pressing problem arises.
But the del the deliberative nature of the
legislative process was the whole point of its
design, even if it goes I'll add, by
the way, even if it goes in a
direction that you don't agree with.
Though they're through that process, the nation can
tap the combined wisdom of the people's elected
representatives, not just that of one faction or
man.
If you disagree with that, then you're not
a you don't believe in a republic or
constitution of this country. Their deliberation tempers impulse
and compromise, hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And
because laws must earn such broad support to
survive the legislative process, they tend to endure,
allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in
ways that they cannot when the rules shift
from day to day or, I'll add, presidency
to presidency.
In all, the legislative process can helps ensure
each of us has a stake in the
laws that govern us and in the nation's
future. For some today, the weight of those
virtues is apparent. For others, it may not
seem so obvious. But if history is any
guide, the tables will turn, and the day
will come when these when those disappointed by
today's result
will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark
of liberty it is. Now that's not to
say that you can have to agree with
the legislative process currently working the way it's
supposed to, or that, as I would point
out, that government should exist at all.
But regardless of your opinion about this, and
this is why it's important to say that,
you can still look at this and understand
that within the process we're forced to exist
in, which is a state of society, that
this does or I should rather point is
the reality
of how this is supposed to work. Now
that's my point to this. I agree disagree.
I don't think the government should be involved.
I don't think any of this should exist
at all. But that's not to say that
that means we should
well, ultimately, that
well, that's a bad way to frame that.
Again, my point is I don't agree with
the government being at all existing at all.
Back to the point, if we're existing within
a government society or state of society,
the point would be not to if if
you're in this and applying to those laws,
that you should not break those laws to
then sort of force them back into place.
If we're gonna get rid of all of
it, then let's do that. And let's not
allow some of it to exist so they
can have power, but all of it entirely.
In fact, I didn't mention this to start.
I had a great interview today with a
person named Matthew Sands from Nations of Sanity.
It's a I'm I'm gonna release it most
likely tomorrow. And this is about a, basically,
a a
proposed sort of peace agreement
for the world that the only law becomes
the non aggression principle. It's an interesting thought.
Now, as always, it seems highly unlikely that
it would be implemented or that it would
be allowed, but it is worth your consideration
and is no more or less ridiculous the
way that it's hard to map out than
the laws we discuss about today or discuss
today.
That that's all to be said. My point
is that there are other avenues. But since
we're here, whether you disagree with him or
not, what he's describing is how it's supposed
to work. That's what I really mean by
saying that. And so for people that are
out here claiming that what they're doing by
the opposite of this is to save this,
it's contradictory.
It's it's ridiculous. It doesn't make any sense.
And in fact, it's being proven to be
the opposite when you look at the outcome,
and it's been going on for quite a
while. Now as Liam McCollum rightly points out,
by the way, Gorsh's reasoning that I just
read to you today with regard to the
legislative power
also applies to war powers
and the power to declare war.
And, yes, anybody knows this who's been paying
attention or people in congress do don't care
about it right now. They know this. They
just don't care.
Right now, everything. Every act of war, whether
you declare war for an official and a
bombing, everything. These are supposed to be something
that goes through congressional approval, and they don't
care left or
right. Now JD Vance comes on the scene
and does his same old sycophantic dance. Whatever
Trump said is the truth. Whatever. How no
matter how dumb I look by trying to
argue. And here's the what here's what's so
funny to me right now. There's so many.
And it look. I could list them all
off again. It's all the people you already
know. It's like they're the the top 10
most ridiculous list of the people out there
who will yell for whatever the team says.
You know who they are. It's embarrassing. Even
Republicans make fun of them today.
Is that my point is that you have
these people on this platform that acts like
everyone's in the same their their own platform
continues to call them out for their lies,
and yet they still seem to populate through
the conversation.
It's just it's it's because we live in
a post truth world that they have created.
Vance says today, the Supreme Court decided that
congress, despite giving the president the ability to
regulate imports, didn't actually mean it. You see,
he's planning on people's stupidity
deliberately. That means he hates you. That means
he thinks that little of you. The point
is
emergency powers is what we're talking about, which
is right there in the documentation, which is
right there in the actual supreme court case.
He knows that. Not that you can't do
those things, but you can't do it the
way that you did it. He knows that,
guys. He's just trying to trick you.
You think I'm wrong? Explain it for me
then. You think or the only alternative is
that he's too stupid to know that or
he doesn't understand it. He's wrong. That's pretty
scary. But he says this is lawless from
the court. Hardly. It's literally a legal ruling
within the law. I mean, it's ridiculous. Plain
and simple. He said, it's only because they
don't like what they don't get what they
want, guys. That's what comes down. That Matt
Miller comes out and goes judicial coup.
Democrat radicals. Well, there's Republicans too, bud, and
it's not a coup. It's clearly the exact
way this process is supposed to work. And
it says, and its only effect will be
to make it harder for the president to
protect American industries and supply chain resiliency. What
he's doing is hurting the supply chain, including
the glyphosate move we're gonna get into next,
by the way. But it says president Trump
has a wide range of other tariff powers,
and he will use them to defend basically,
what he's saying is we're gonna do it
anyway in some way or another, which is
what's happening. But it says the ruling upholds
the constitution. You gotta love that, guys, which,
as I keep seeing, by the way, these
things have a tendency to slowly dissipate. Somebody
goes in there, alters it, goes away. Right?
They this happens constantly,
which reserves the power to tax exclusively for
congress. The court determined tariffs are taxes, and
the nineteen seventy seven e IEE EPA's power
to regulate imports does not explicitly delegate this
taking this taxing authority to the president.
Right? Well, they don't care. He's gonna keep
yelling that regardless, and they're gonna ignore it,
act like it's only Democrats disagree because that's
what they do. Justin Amash
responds to his post and says, according to
JD Vance, a Supreme Court decision that upholds
the law and halts lawlessness
is the real lawlessness.
You see how this works? This is the
post truth world. This is the inverse of
the reality. This is not an accident.
And then he gripes about the president's power
being limited.
And he goes, yeah. That's the point of
the constitution.
The framers deliberately constrain the president. They act
like somehow by not allowing him whatever he
wants at all times is somehow a bastardization
of the power structure. That, again, either means
they don't understand the way this was created
or they don't care and they're willing to
make you look stupid to get what they
want.
Call them out. That's crazy. That means they
think so little of you. Speaker Johnson, same
point. No one can deny that the president's
use of tariffs has brought in billions of
dollars. Well, that's
I depends on what we're actually pointing to
in the larger sense, but that doesn't matter
if we're talking about money that goes to
you.
None of this has gone to you. You're
paying. That's what's so crazy about the way
this is gonna end up in a second
with where they're claiming that money needs to
go. But it says he's claiming no one
can deny well, anybody can deny anything, but
they that he brought in all this money.
And and here's the point, and created immense
leverage for American trade strategy for the secure
securing strong reciprocal America first trade agreements with
countries that have been taking advantage of American
workers for decades. What you effectively did was
strong-arm countries into getting what you want in
it for a temporary gain that in no
way actually translated to Americans.
Maybe it would have in the future. My
point, though, is these short term strong-arm tactics
would guarantee, in my experience, that it would
end up hurting trade for this country or
any number of things. You're basically
dealing
at the butt of a or at the
barrel of a gun
in an analogy sense. Right? You're strong arming
or at a fist or whatever. You're you're
basically just using strength and force to dictate
what you want. And I should say it
more specifically,
financial strength and force. You're using your financial
position to basically muscle people to get what
you want. And, sure, you could do that.
And, sure, it might even benefit them, not
you, them, to the short term.
But how when has that ever worked in
some like, the point is that agreements like
that tend to function with respect, tend to
function with some level of agreement or equally
beneficial. That's not what they're doing. That's my
point about China and the US government in
policy in general. They're going around just taking
and stealing and forcing while other groups, even
if they're dishonest and criminal, are making agreements
with other countries.
But he says congress and the administration will
determine the best path forward in the coming
weeks. Oh, now you wanna include congress. How
funny how that works. Where I mean, Johnson,
you guys have been completely, completely
inept.
War, anything.
Speaker. Speak I mean, this is how he
should be remembered as one of the most
weak, ineffectual speakers of the house I've ever
seen in this country.
I mean, the truth is he just works
for Trump, and everyone can see that. And
it this is somebody who they hate each
other, and he's still willing to bow to
whatever Trump needs, which probably tells you it's
something above Trump. But Mike Young says, yes,
tariffs brought in revenue. That's sure. They also
raised prices on groceries, cars, and farm equipment
while inventing retaliation
against our exporters.
If we truly want to honor American workers,
we should choose policies that
cut their costs and expand their markets, not
ones that quietly tax them. And his point
and and actually, like I said, actually end
up shrinking the markets that Americans this is
history, guys. Now it's not to say it'll
always go this way. BC, they're doing this
for their benefit. And, again, this is how
little respect they have for us that they
would are willing to lie to you even
though you know that we can look it
up because they think we'll fall for it.
Now as unusual whales points out, the US
government may now owe
US companies and others, by the way, $175,000,000,000
in tariff refunds.
Well, as Bark brightly points out,
these this is Americans. It's a little GIF
of I think it's,
what is it? The one with the spinning
top? I forget the name of the movie.
Anyway, it's a it's a clip of, Leonardo
DiCaprio kind of waking up and looking around,
and it's like, this is Americans realizing
that realizing American citizens,
which is what happened, paid a $175,000,000,000
while he claimed he was making you money
in illegal tariffs, and it's being refunded
to companies
instead of you.
So in effect, you could argue that this
was the plan even. I don't not necessarily
know if I believe that or not, but
think about it. A situation to create a
transfer of wealth, just like with COVID or
any other situation, that just extracts wealth from
the population and puts in the hands of
the elitist upper class or just elitist class.
Think about it. Because why would that go
back to these companies?
Shouldn't. They didn't
this this feels like a transfer of wealth.
I mean, how many more ways do we
need to see that this administration is not
in the interest of the American people or
the working man?
Here's what Trump actually just said.
Without tariffs,
what would you do? You know what? Everybody
would be bankrupt. Everybody. The whole country would
be bankrupt.
And I have to wait for this decision.
I've been waiting forever.
Forever.
And the language is clear that I have
the right to do it as president. I
And that's the kind of stuff you get.
Then you get these mindless repeaters that go
out and go, the language is clear. Don't
you know? In what document, bud? Oh, I
don't know. Trump said it. In what? It's
not, though. If you look at the language,
you can literally see that, but they don't
care. They just repeat, and it's millions of
people. But it's the same on either side,
really. But the real point, guys,
is the money.
Without tariffs, what would you everybody would be
bankrupt. I mean, come on, guys. Think about
how dumb that is. What you're saying is
that everybody in this country would go bankrupt
because you don't make us pay more money
for our goods than you get money. I
mean, think about how stupid that is. You
can go back before taxes or any situation
and realize that
exchanging goods,
production, that that's revenue. And, ultimately,
government getting involved is what always causes all
these problems. But he's just trying to convince
you that we have to have whatever he's
confusing you with Otherwise, everything falls apart. Well,
that's because things are falling apart. Not because
of that, but because we're finally starting to
see that this thing is built on sand.
And they've and as that's happening, they're literally
absorbing every possible thing they can before it
all sinks. That's what it feels like. That
same kind of thing. This guy just it's
a meme of Trump going, this is a
cat over a duck, and then all of
them bottom going, that's a cat. Just whatever.
Just lie. Okay. We all repeat the lie.
That's what keeps happening.
And, of course, to finish this segment, he
comes out after all of that and says
this. Oh, did I forget to grab it?
Here, I'm gonna grab this. I'll read it
to you while I'm grabbing that or if
I can multitask. Effective immediately, all national security
tariffs, section two three two, and exec and
existing section three zero one tariffs remain in
place.
Oh, great. So they rule that Trump can't
do this with emergency orders.
Right? That was the main the crux of
the point. And then so his answer is
to use emergency orders
to make sure it continues.
I mean, what more do you need to
see to recognize lawlessness?
It's this is
very, very clear. In order to protect and
it says so.
In order to protect our country,
a president can actually charge more tariffs than
I was charging in the past
period of a year
under the various tariffs
authorities. So we can There's some note that
wrote for him? I mean, what do you
even read? The point is that the the
law the reality of his powers and this
is where we're at with this whole thing.
And section no. No. The section two, I
can do whatever I want. Like, the these
are not true.
It's just the reality. If you understand even
remotely the reality of how this was built
in order to check power, why would there
be a situation where they can just always
do what they want? It doesn't make any
sense, and everybody knows that.
So I don't even he's just reading off
something that
says what he thinks is the reality. It
doesn't mean it's the reality.
Use other of the statutes,
other of the tariff authorities,
which have also been confirmed
and are fully allowed.
Therefore, effective immediately,
all national security tariffs under section two thirty
two and existing
section three zero one tariffs, they're existing, they're
there,
remain
in place, fully in place,
and in full force and effect.
Today, I will sign an order to impose
a 10% global tariff under section one twenty
two over and above
our normal tariffs already being charged.
And we're also
initiating several section three zero one and other
investigations
to protect our country
from unfair trading practices
of other countries and companies.
Thank you for your attention to this
Great.
So, you know, the team's gonna cheer no
matter what. That's what they do. But just
recognize that this is, you know, an extension.
It's it's just one more of the same
kind of things. Now on the
corruption side of this before we finish with
the glyphosate focus,
Aaron Day points this out. This is the
most corrupt administration in US history. Now you
can disagree with that. Corruption is quite obvious,
though.
Howard Lutnick's family firm reportedly
bought tariff refund rights
for 20 to 30¢ on the dollar after
Liberation Day last year.
Think about this. Now the Supreme Court has
struck down the tariffs. Translation, for every $100
invested, Lutnick's sons
may have just made three to five times
their money.
Insiders knew. Regular Americans paid. Welcome to corrupt
America where policy is a profit scheme.
Guys, think about this. Now, I can't still
don't know for sure.
Could've just been their reaction when they saw
it following and they said, screw it. Let's
make money. But if you recognize Lutnick did
this last year, which is only we're only
talking about what was Liberation Day? What's the
day we're we're talking about at the most
some, you know, months ago. And so the
reality is that this
was ultimately ended up where they
transferred money or at least it's about to
transfer money from from you from basically what
they collected back to the companies.
And at the same time, they're making investments
that gain them money from the fact that
this has now,
you know, the the the refund
to the tariffs. So if you know that
they set this up to gain from the
refund and that the money will go back
to companies that they were working with, how
else do you view that? Now, again, I'm
gonna be clear that I can't prove that
that was designed, but that is the outcome.
I I just it's it's insane to me,
the level of corruption on its face in
or I'm just just to keep going since
I want I've already taken too long in
this part.
This is the same conversation. Oh, I was
gonna jump through real quick is the is
the the pump and dump scams for crypto.
I mean, they're in your face. I talked
about this the moment he got elected and
the what it was, the Trump coin? It
went down, like, 70%, and it just stayed
there. They just stole money from everybody.
And and Max Blumenthal says Trump Inc. Corruption
is so extensive, it's difficult to keep tabs.
Besides cashing in on the tariff policy, he
personally engineered financial sleazalore, he calls them. Howard
Lutnick is also deregulating crypto while holding a
$600,000,000
stake in Tether.
The
paper over the conflict of interest, he had
to control of Tether to his 26 year
old son,
who now serves as the chair of Cantor
Fitzgerald, which is the company.
I I there's no that's not how that's
supposed to work. It's still your family, Trump's
son, same conversation. And it says with Lutnick's
apparent blessing, Tether has relocated to, guess what,
El Salvador,
where Trump's backed crypto gulag master
Bukule
or Bukule, excuse me, exempts it from taxation
and regulation. See how that works out? You
literally hand deliver him the MS 13 members
that he's working with. You he gives you
a tax exempt regulation situation. I mean, whether
that's the exchange or not, this is a
tit for tat dynamic, and these people are
corrupt.
All of this is a conflict of interest
and shouldn't be existing in the first place.
But, hey, no one signed ethics pledges, so
who cares. Right? No one they they had
no intention of upholding those ethics.
Tenth amendment center says corruption, plunder, and waste.
Thomas Jefferson said that's just what we get
with too much centralized power. He warned us.
We didn't listen. He said, quote, our country
is too large to have its all have
all its affairs directed by a single government.
Public servants at such a distance and from
under the eye of their constituents
will, from the circumstances of circumstance of distance,
be unable to administer and overlook all the
details necessary for the good government of the
citizen. And the same circumstance by rendering detection
impossible to their constituents
will in oops.
Will invite the public agents to corrupt, plunder,
and waste.
And there we are.
And frankly, you could say Trump's the same
thing.
Now Aaron Day points out,
a sitting US president launched two meme coins
that effectively wiped out $3,400,000,000
from retail investors while insiders
quietly cashed out $600,000,000.
They well, that's an interesting overlap.
Talking about $600,000,000.
What was it again?
I just think that's interesting. Not that who
knows if there's connection or not. Just happens
to be the same amount he has at
stake in in Tether. That I mean, he
has had that before this, so I don't
think that's what that came from. Right? But
interesting nonetheless. Right? So my point is you
can prove all of this, guys.
The peep these insiders cashed out quietly right
before it all collapsed, and you the the
MAGA supporters
gave lost billions of dollars. And this is
there's multiple examples of this.
Here
is the Trump brothers
or, sons. Excuse me. Here's the oh, the
brothers too. But here's what they have to
say about this. And this is this is
it's it's edited. Right? There's more to it.
But realize what they're ultimately saying here.
That not it there there it's a corrupt
situation. Right?
So if they were honestly trying to change
that, then they wouldn't fall in and use
the corrupt situation. Just go, well, that's, you
know, it's the way it is, which is
what they're doing.
What the what the critics would say, they'd
say that the credibility factor is the the
the Trump name and the Trump White House
and that everyone, you know, is here to
curry favor. I think again, well, the the
the great honor here is they didn't give
us much of a choice. When you had
every they created this monster. When you had
every either one of us could have called
any banker in New York over the last
twenty years and gotten a loan for a
building and, you know, we just realized we
were sort of the top of the Ponzi
scheme that was banking. Well, you
You
know? Okay.
So we were on top of the Ponzi
scheme that is banking, which is exactly the
point. Right? Okay. So let's just say you
think that you you wanna save America.
Would you then step into that and then
just take advantage of that Ponzi scheme and
effectively, you know, extract money from the people
that you are fighting or you claim you're
fighting for? And the the MAGA people themselves
in particular with your fake phone, with your
fake cryptos. That's all happened, by the way.
Remember that Trump phone? What happened? Oh, yeah.
That's right. It was made in China and
and Israel and and it was a lie.
That's right. Same with the with the Eric
Prince phone.
They're just it's corrupt. It's corrupt on its
face.
And so here, if you're saying that we're
on the top of this as he's writing
Eric, they said the quiet part out loud.
The The corruption runs deep, he writes, and
suddenly all the people who were outraged that
Hunter Biden worked for Ukraine Gas Company suddenly
don't care that Trump's are making billions of
dollars, much of which is from foreign countries
and governments. And it's a good point regardless
of how partisan and ridiculous this guy can
be. The reality is that if you're gonna
be part nonpartisan objective, I'm gonna be outraged
at a 100 Biden story and be outraged
about the Trump's doing the same thing. Not
the same thing, but using the corruption to
profit them to profit off of your
I mean, profit from the,
like, the willful decision to not try to
solve the problem.
So last couple points, this is not this
is a account called CuckTurd
saying oh, I guess I just said that.
I spelled it out earlier. Trump and his
kids are ope are opening their own poly
market.
So they can now personally profit off of
every
house vote, press conference, whatever you wanna you
know, inside information.
Trump's social media company is going to be
launching a prediction betting marketplace.
I mean, I don't even any of these
things
there should be a law that I don't
even know how they could just give money
to somebody they know and that they could
do it. But the fact that people are
not betting on decisions being made, you know
these people are profiting off of this. Internally,
100%,
it's being shown in so many ways. This
poly market overlap, people are betting on wars
or betting on policy decisions that they're involved
in. I mean, the corruption is so so
acute, so obvious right now.
So now they're just going, shoot. Let's get
involved. Let's build our own.
Seems to be what's happening.
Lastly,
let's not forget from the crypto side of
it. It's, as I wrote, they're all doing
it. All the so called rebels flying the
deep state, they need to scam you with
pump and dump money laundering operations because, you
know, for freedom or whatever. This is what's
happening. This is Malay, same thing. They all
did this for the most part. They have
this old version of it. He pumped you
he pumped up his coin, and it fell,
collapsed.
Nobody seemed to care, apparently.
So on the point of corruption, guys,
I actually like I said at the beginning,
I'm just kinda just shocked that this is
the way this is going because of r
q junior, because of what Trump has said
before, because of his claims.
Not like he's he's already been caught lying
about damn near everything else, but, you know,
the way this has gone down is my
point is I think this has been driving
from something else. But I'm gonna include my
recent discussion because it is relevant to this
from yesterday or two days two days ago.
New bill supported by White House bypasses RFK
Junior's HHS
in order to direct Soufan Gavi.
Also, Israel mentions, what, was it, 35 times
in the bill? Now it's only passed at
the house, which is predominantly repop or, you
know, majority is,
Republican,
and it's in the senate.
Who knows how when how long that'll take
if and maybe it'll ever pass. But what
I'm trying to highlight is that the White
House, which I'll actually grab and show you
again since that's important for the claim.
This is the White House direct post from
the executive office of the president.
This January, this year, and it says very
clearly, the administration supports HR seven zero zero
six. That's the bill. That's the bill we're
talking about, and that bill is explicit. It's,
you know and and it's not about just
funding. It's making sure that the money circumvents
the HHS and goes through the state department
to go to Gavi. It's right in the
bill. We discussed it all in here as
well as the fact that, what was the
other one? It was
there's something else there too. Anyway, the point
was it's just contradicting
Maha and everything else they're talking about.
There's other vaccine conferences. There's tons of stuff
in there that contradict what oh, that's what
it was. There's things about funding HIV prevention
in Africa or climate change to all the
things that they're like, democrats are so crazy,
and it's all right there in the bill
that they predominantly support.
Very frustrating. So on the point of glyphosate,
it's just one more example of them just
completely contradicting what they told people they were
gonna do in the regard to Maha.
So, Kelly Ryerson point says, just as the
large MAHA base begins to consider what to
do at midterms,
the president issues an executive order to expand
domestic glyphosate production, the very same carcinogenic
pesticide
that MAHA cares about most.
Why would he do this before you see
what I'm saying before midterms? What's going on?
Who is driving this and what's the objective
here? Because it does not seem that his
agenda is to win over his own people.
So here's what the actual document said. This
is from today.
Promoting and it's it's glyphosate, but it's specifically
of phosphorus
elements,
which I find very relevant seeing as how
Israel is using white phosphorus and glyphosate all
over the place as weapons.
Promoting the national defense by ensuring an adequate
supply of elemental phosphorus
and glyphosate based herbicides.
Now it says elemental phosphorus is pervasive in
defense supply chains and therefore crucial to military
readiness and natural defense. Well, in regard to
white phosphorus, it is a war cry. It
is a weapon.
It is illegal to use outside of the
ridiculous allowance for signaling,
which they
don't need to do. Plenty of other things
they can the bottom line is they get
caught using it in the middle of the
day all the time killing civilians, and they
claim signal. No, they're murdering people with illegal
weapons.
But why that would be something you demand
to be I think you know. In my
opinion, I think it's clear because
everything I'm seeing this administration do is because
there's some other entity that is demanding that
it happen.
Elemental phosphorus is also a critical precursor element
for the production of glyphosate based herbicides,
which play a crucial role
critical role, in maintaining America's agricultural advantage by
enabling farmers to efficiently and cost effectively produce
food and livestock. That's insane.
That's not true. The reality is that glyphosate
has destroyed our industries and forced them into
a place where they have to drench these
things in toxic chemicals that do, in many
ways, affect the way that they grow,
despite what they claim,
and that they now are forced to use
it. One, because of there are many overlaps,
because of genetically modified,
patented seeds that are being used. That's the
way this works. Right? You're forced to use
these seeds because they can resist the dangerous
chemical you're spraying on them because they've modified
the seed. The problem though is those seeds
then blow and mix and and blend with
other things, which has been proven. And that's
why you have, like, Food Inc. Documentary that
shows farmers who are having their land stolen
because Monsanto, now Bayer, comes in and goes,
hey. We tested and your your seed is
our patent.
Even though they didn't pay for that and
aren't using it, they've been growing their own
organic seed for their entire life. They now
own that farm. Literally has happened countless times.
So what you're talking about is something that
you have illegitimately
forced on this country,
made to be so ubiquitous that it's damn
near everything,
and now saying we have to maintain it
because, well, it's it's necessary for our our
production.
Well, maybe because you forced in this problematic
situation. You see how that works?
The last thing we should be doing is
growing this problem even if it is ubiquitous.
And and and making it something that is
not just
used, but, like, to the point to where
he's gonna make it an absolute for everything
you're consuming in this country.
As the most widely used crop protection
tools in The United States, he writes, agriculture,
glyphosate based herbicides are a cornerstone of this
nation's agriculture productivity and rural economy,
allowing United States farmers and ranchers to maintain
high yields, ridiculous, and low production cost while
ensuring they help that healthy, affordable
food options remain within reach for all American
families. Now the the argument always goes that
it increases yield. I haven't I I can't
verify that for many reasons. But let's just
even say that it does increase yield. That's
not the real point here. It is about
the reality of the risks to our health.
So you could even argue that more food
will increase the, you know, life or whatever,
but if you actually factor in the obviously
detrimental effects of this in hundreds of ways,
you are reducing the population. You are reducing
people's lifespans.
And the extra food you think is there
wouldn't change anything. On top of the fact
that I don't even think that's the reality,
but that's my opinion.
It says there is no direct one for
one chemical alternative
to glyphosate based herbicides. Yeah. But nobody wants
this. This is a dangerous thing that is
used as a weapon in other places by
Israel.
And you're using this to treat our food,
and there's no one for one chemical alternative
because what they're talking about is that we
have created this dangerous thing that we claim
stops all these dangerous bugs and all these
dangerous things. And so if we stop that,
we're gonna have to use more than one
thing.
Well, you see, this is the same kind
of argument of, well, we can't give everybody
due process. That's just difficult.
Well, damn. So since when did we go,
oh, that's just hard. Let's go the simple
route because that's always the right path?
This is dangerous.
This is deadly.
This is cancerous.
Why in the world would we go, oh,
well, it's just easier.
Too bad.
You see, I I will admit most farmers
who are not just mainstream monocrop
monsters because of the way we built this
would demand that this wouldn't be the reality.
To grow what they want, as much as
they want, where they want, how they want,
and have people come by what they want.
You know, a real peer to peer economy.
The difference is they need this to be
the only way because small farmers don't exist
in this world.
You only have monocrop,
massive, corporate farmers, and everybody else just goes
to those that that's what it is. That's
this is what they're driving in. This was
starting to change.
And here we are. The Maha Make America
Great Again group was the one making sure
it never stops.
Now, that's not the people, mind you. That's
the government pretending to make this country great
again.
Now it says, there's, lack of access to
glyphosate based herbicides would critically jeopardize agricultural productivity.
I disagree. Adding pressure to the domestic food
system and may result in a transition to
cropland to use other,
other uses due to low productivity. So, just
like the Stardust Solutions point, right? You could
argue this was clearly manufactured
to create the choke point where we can't
stop using it because then we're screwed. Doesn't
that sound familiar? Like, they're literally setting up
these these
genetically manipulative choke points with our natural processes
to where we have to deal with them
instead of the natural like, you can't just
grow plant something. You have to deal through
their weird system. That's how the stars the
the the geoengineering conversation started solutions.
We talked about it if you missed that
show. It's an Israeli company, and they're are
they're planning to start testing it April 2026,
everywhere.
And that is about literally something that even
the best experts in the world are saying,
once you start that, you can't stop because
then it will get worse.
So then forever, you're stuck with them doing
this for hundreds of years. That's their plan.
I mean, how does this sound like something
anybody is even regarding as a solution?
To me, that's the same thing right here.
But it's too late now. We're done. We're
there. But it doesn't mean we can't roll
it back. It just might actually be difficult.
Now I'm not even gonna say that means
less food. It just means that this will
be something that would be a a process.
Ensuring an adequate supply of elemental phosphorus and
glyphosate based herbicides is thus crucial to national
security and defense.
Whatever.
I mean, you know, it's just it's just
so too can anything be. By that logic,
you could say, okay. Fine. Anything we use
in a daily process is then therefore national
security because that keeps us fed and moving
and and awake or whatever it is to
therefore make sure we can defend it. Or
that you can make it, by the way
they're doing this, which is what they've been
doing for years, everything.
Anything, everywhere, all the time, whatever you want
it to be, can be national security, and
that therefore, we can't show it to you,
top secret, and you don't get to know.
Shut up and go away.
Constitution doesn't matter. I mean, that that's where
we are today. Indeed, he writes, there is
only a single domestic producer of elemental phosphorus
and glyphosate based herbicides.
And this producer,
that shall not be nay there, does not
meet our annual needs for these output inputs.
For that reason, more than 6,000,000
kilograms of elemental phosphorus are imported from other
countries annually.
Think about this when most Americans are clearly
not wanting this, and you're going so far
as to import what you need to make
sure that we keep doing it.
I accordingly find that consistent with the, excuse
me, the Department of Interior Design,
elemental phosphorus
is a scarce material that is critical to
national defense and security.
Only
in a world where you're doing what they're
doing.
Right? America first, none of this is mad.
None of this is important.
If you're doing what they're doing, well, yeah.
Now you need all of the defense tools
and weaponry and and and, you know, chemical
weapons and and AI manipulant. That's what they're
building it out for.
None of this is about American interest in
any way, shape, or form, especially from an
America first perspective.
Now it says to allocate material services and
facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate
to ensuring a continued and adequate supply of
elemental phosphorus and glyphosate based herbicides, you know,
forever. Just that's the plan. Forever.
Accordingly, this secretary shall ensure that any order
rule or regulation issued under this section does
not
place the corporate viability
of any domestic producer or element of phosphorus
or glyphosate
at risk. So not only does it say
this is necessary,
he writes into it that you can't even
take action that causes a risk to the
corporate viability of the company.
Isn't that fascism? Aren't you literally just blending
the your by government act
creating a shield to go after the company
because it's interest of national security?
Phosphor well, phosphorus, but glyphosate.
In what world does a company that's supposed
to be in some kind of a capitalist,
you know,
supply what's the word I'm looking for?
You know, where it's based on merit or
whatever where you can just go, well, no.
We need it. So therefore, they're always good.
Well, how about the people investing in that?
Great. We're gonna make millions of dollars. How
about they already knew that and that's why
they already invested? Here we go, round and
round we go. Guys, no matter how you
look at this, it's corrupt. But on top
of it all, this is deadly, dangerous. It's
not what we want, and it's not what
Americans were calling for.
Farm action?
Here's what Trump was saying.
Well, did I miss all these? Yeah, I
did. How did I miss that?
So this is 2024. Now, this is where
it really has to this has to really
register, guys.
You can agree. You can think it's right.
You can even think that it's not dangerous.
Well, if that's the case, then explain to
me why Trump was telling you that it
was dangerous back in 2024.
Alright? I mean, again, you can you have
you can go, oh, he changes my he
at this point is he either was wrong
here or lying,
or he's wrong or lying now.
Right? It's pretty simple. We're joining forces to
defeat government corruption, restore free speech, and make
America healthy again. We're gonna make America healthy
again, you know?
We're a nation that It just reads off
what it is. You know? What what do
they wanna hear? Oh, that's right. This is
what they like to hear in this place.
Blah blah blah blah. Is that what they
did? No.
Is not doing well in a lot of
ways, and we're not doing so well with
health, but we're gonna solve a lot of
those problems I think over the next short
period of time a lot of its common
a lot of that's common sense too it's
all common sense when you get right down
to it but
we're gonna get toxic chemicals out of our
environment and we're gonna get them out of
our food supply We're gonna get them out
of our bodies. Yeah. We'll get them out
of our body. Right? Right?
Hooray.
And then, oh, whoops. Never mind.
Right? Oh, yay. Oh, the things he said.
It's great. And then does the opposite.
It's like that that that cartoon that that
video somebody made with the kid drawing the
line in the sand. It's just there's only
so many times you can see this and
not recognize that they either never cared or
they will never care because it's about the
team.
2024. We're going to get it out. '26.
Crucial national security.
Okay. Well, our here's Arf k Junior twenty
twenty four. The herbicide glyphosate is one of
the likely culprits in America's chronic disease epidemic.
How can you have him in MAHA as
the leading position of HHS
and then have Trump do things repeatedly, like
self amplifying COVID shots or Stargate or everything
else we're talking about?
Now I you I know you guys don't
need to hear it. I'm just I'm belaboring
the point because it's important.
Much more widely used than than in Europe.
Shockingly, much of our exposure comes from its
use as a,
what is it? A desiccant
on wheat, not as an herbicide. From there,
it goes straight into our bodies. My USDA
will ban that practice.
It's both, by the way, and he said
the same. He's just making a point is
that the worst example is there. But all
of it is now being used and is
a national security
imperative.
I simply said, you still there, Kennedy? How
How can you be silent on this? Which
apparently he is. Let's double check though, since
he might have posted something since I went
live.
Nope.
Last post was the nineteenth.
Nothing. That peep. Here's his personal account. Or
rather, this is the secretary. Right. This is
the personal account.
Nope. No. He's not required to comment. But,
I mean, come on, guys. You the the
point was, if this was something that you
didn't agree with as as the head of
HHS and somebody who's supposed to be leading
MAHA, you would go, woah. Okay. I'm commenting
on this. But you know what? Trump would
lose his mind and probably do something about
you. Fire you, attack you,
something.
I mean, or you have to agree that
he just doesn't care.
I'm not who knows? You could decide for
yourself or even blackmail. I don't know. But
you have to realize that he's not genuine
for whatever reason if he's not really pushing
back on this stuff, and he hasn't been
for a while.
Oh, and this is the one I played
in the beginning.
Well, I believe that,
glyphosate
causes cancer.
Simple.
And here we are. Now we're gonna make
it a national security imperative.
He would call that out. Here's his,
running mate when he was running for president.
I just,
spoke to the EPA this morning. There's a
big group of people, scientists out there for
for ten years now. They've been trying to
get them to stop glyphosate
spraying in in harvest. So, you you know,
farmers will use glyphosate throughout the crop cycle,
But a practice that we do here in
The United States that's banned in Europe
is,
harp preharvest
desiccation desiccation, which This is what our k
was talking about.
Which is spraying the crops to kill the
weeds, to loosen the crops so that they're
easier to harvest. But the Now realize that
the same point. Right? So even if you
took away because ultimately, both of them are
are examples of putting it on your crops.
Right? But the first example is where it's
on the crops as they grow, which does
absorb and does ultimately you know, that's the
problem. Then the last part, though, which they're
arguing, and it is, it's far more damaging
and dangerous, is when they just drench it
right before it's being harvested to help it
dry out.
So even if you took that last part
away, because I worry that's how he's framing
that. Like, that's the real problem.
It's not it's in fact, it's not it's
half the problem.
That's just that's just how it makes it
so prevalent and so it's still in everything.
You know what I'm saying? So I I
thought it was important to point that out
because I worry he's making that argument to
sort of create the secondary. Well, we stopped
that one, and now we win. Right? No.
You didn't. It's still happening. But, anyway, so
that's what she's talking about. Think about that
with all how how dangerous this is, drenching
them before they then dry that that leaves
that residue, and you eat that. Problem with
that is the residues.
The glyphosate residues don't have time to dry
out and dissipate.
So we're eating heavy
loads of glyphosate.
Yeah. And we're, you know buying non organic,
you know, foods that are sold at, you
know, Walmart, whatever else. Chatting with the EPA
this morning, I zoomed in.
I was, virtual, but the rest of the
group was was there in person. And for
ten years, this group has been telling the
EPA about this. And for ten years, the
EPA has failed to act. This is one
of the easiest things we could Yep. See?
Easiest.
Okay. Where's RK Junior? Where's Trump? They don't
want to change, guys, because either corporate interests
are too important or something else is driving
that bus. The last thing is whether it's
what's good for you, whether it's safe and
healthy for you because it's obvious, guys. It's
self evident.
And EPA? Well, yeah, we know how that
works. Asking about dioxins and PFAS and whatever
else. They are not what they pretend to
be. They might have been at one point,
but it's been captured like every other part
of this government. And I don't mean that
as literally every single person. But the institutions,
the entities, congress, these things don't operate.
I mean, we all argue, but we all
complain about it. The question we should be
asking, not only is not just why it's
not, but who and how. Because something is
absolutely
dictating
or influencing
how this is happening.
So here's just an example of somebody. I'm
not familiar with them, but, you know, what
is it? Almost 300,000 followers. Glied will say
it is safe and effective. At first, I
thought it was a joke. I've genuinely, first,
I thought this was like a parody because
safe and effective. And it says, and the
White House just issued an executive order to
produce more of it. Excellent.
Because here's another post where they write, the
acute toxicity of glyphosate is considerably less than
that for a common substance like vitamin d.
I mean, I'm still kind of like, is
this guy is this a joke? Is this
like a parody account? I didn't it doesn't
appear to be. That's insane.
Not even their studies make that argument. So
this seems to be somebody, either a joke,
which it still may be and I just
can't see how the punch where the punchline
is, or it's somebody who's willing to just
lie to you for for even their own
studies that make it out to be not
as dangerous. Do not argue it's benign like
vitamin d. It's crazy. And this, guys, this
is the same as the administration
who is right now trying to push back
on the fluoride ruling. They don't care about
your health, guys. So to finish, let's just
here's just a ton of our there's a
lot of it, by the way. These are
mostly articles, though. It's not the three hour
shows. I recommend you read through these, guys.
Now this is a lot of older work.
Some of these are I wrote myself. Some
of these go back, you know, you know,
2016
forward. Didn't remember on these. Some of these
written a long time ago. So not only
has my opinions and views changed quite a
bit, it doesn't I'm damn near consist or
pretty damn consistent with what I thought then.
I just learned more over the years. So
keep that in mind as well as the
fact that the way a lot of these
older articles work, I I I linked a
lot of them back then to, like, things
I I don't like this practice anymore, so
I think it doesn't make as much sense.
But I would link a lot of things
to just other articles. So that's not a
link to the claim. It's a link to
something about glyphosate, which so you can see
why I don't like that as much, and
I the links would end up down here.
So for the just know that some of
these older ones, the links that you're looking
for will be at the bottom. Whereas the
all the new stuff today, they're hyperlinked right
into the article. I just think that's important
because you'll go through and be like, where's
the study? And it goes to a link
to TLabs or, you know, that's that's, again,
why I don't like that practice today because
people think you're just using your own information
to prove things, you know? But every one
of these
links to studies, many of which I include,
or,
you know, just something else that will verify
these claims from, you know, a scientist or
a doctor or whatever else. And on top
of that, a lot of it is mainstream,
directly from mainstream science publications,
but also a lot of it is independent
work. So don't let that then make you
think it's not valid. Look into it, and
you'll find that this stuff is exactly what's
going on. This goes back to 2016.
Monsanto's chemical, glyphosate, makes its way into 85%.
This is then. It's way worse now. 85%
of personal hygiene cotton products.
Now just so you know, jumping to the
end, it's ubiquitous, guys. It is everywhere. And
this has been scientifically proven. That's why it's
so alarming to me. But it's all the
cotton products you're using, clothes you're wearing, the
foods you're eating, it's everywhere.
Monsanto Wheat Killer found in 14 popular German
beers, 2,016.
I found this crazy because this they the
story went these are, like, craft beers they
make in Germany. And they're, like, you know,
generationally
and so important to them, and the ingredients
are important. They're craft and organic and whatever.
Right? And they tested them, and they all
glyphosate.
And I said, and and I you know,
how this tends to go sort of like
with the farm raised salmon where they go,
oh, well, turns out now it's all farm
raised because of the way we we made
this. You know, they they breaded they bled
and bred. Excuse me. So then they just
kinda pass a rule that goes, well, there's
no now it's all the same. So therefore,
now it's all you know, they basically make
the argument that some of these groups that
are clearly farm raised salmon are just now
not farm raised because of the their waving
of their hand. It's insulting because it's not
true. So in this case, with the way
glyphosate is, as well as this next story
about wines,
they just kinda go, well, now that it's
ubiquitous, it is organic, essentially. They don't make
that argument, but they just no longer argue.
Technically, if it has glyphosate, it wouldn't be
organic.
But they still call them organic. Same for
the wines in Napa Valley.
But they're not, technically. But because they want
to call it that, they just go, well,
it is though because it's in everything. So,
right? Well, that's not really the term organic.
But a bastardization of it. Anyway,
same thing here. With the beers, they were
very upset about that, but, you know, they're
gonna keep making their beers because now it's
everywhere. But it's, you know, you you lost
something there. Monsanto's glyphosate found in all
organic wines tested in Napa Valley, even organic
ones. Same that was why I was saying
that. This was 2016.
I believe it was March 28.
And this was and, again, this was you
could look this up. I'm including all of
this. Moms Crest America did a great work
on this when they did they put in
the work. This was Zen Honeycutt. I actually,
hosted a panel on a CHD event with
her. She's very intelligent.
And it's it's you can look at it
for yourself. The truth
is that now that it's there again, it's
everywhere. They just kinda put it behind them.
It's sort of like the Dioxin argument, which
is what I think they were trying to
accomplish and maybe already have.
That's not organic. It's also dangerous for you.
So that's lost forever.
This one, I I titled this the the
piss test heard around the world. A 150
European Parliament members to test urine for glyphosate.
I've brought these up many times over the
years. This is April 2016.
So, the way this worked out quickly,
ultimately, a 150 of them were supposed to
test their urine. I think it amounted to
forty eight of them actually going through the
test, and every single one of them had
po tested positive for glyphosate.
Here's the actual Guardian article about it.
150 MPs are expected to give their urine
samples. Now guess what, guys? You'll be completely
not surprised to find out that almost nobody
followed up with the results. It's just, of
course, because why would we want you to
find out that it was a problem? But
you can I I very much did, and
you can follow it up for yourself? Almost
all Germans contaminated with glyphosate. This is this
is the same conversation, but slightly different. You
know, the point is,
in this case,
48, I believe, again, there was the number.
You can all the links are in here.
Had glyphosate. Even though many of them were
arguing that that would prove that it wasn't
a problem. Right? And so here we go.
In everyone of your in everyone's urine in
2016!
And it and the the overall point with
this one was, from a German perspective in
March, they found that it was basically in
every single person in Germany.
Think about where we are right now and
what they're doing, guys. This has been clear
for so long.
Groundbreaking review shows how glyphosate alters DNA for
chronic illness.
2016.
Here's studies.
Now I recently reached back out to Stephanie
Seneff.
Here we had an interview
with her with, Denny Rancourt as well.
Right here.
Stephanie Seneff, Denny Rancourt,
round table, glyphosate mRNA and spike proteins destroying
your body. She's very intelligent. She's working on
this as a PhD on glyphosate for a
long time and argued in this interview that
it was synergistically working to destroy your body
with the COVID nineteen shot, almost as if
they've been designed that way.
And this is one of those studies back
in 2013, glyphosate suppression
of cytochrome
p four fifty enzymes and amino acid biosynthesis
by the gut microbiome,
pathways to modern disease. And a follow-up, 2016,
glyphosate pathways to modern diseases five, amino acid
analog and glycine in diverse proteins. It says,
glyphosate,
its presence in food for human consumption and
animal feed is ubiquitous.
Back in 2016.
Epidemiological
studies have revealed a strong correlation between the
increasing incidence in The United States of a
large number of chronic diseases, as has been
completely increasing every year, and the increased use
of glyphosate herbicide on corn, soy, wheat crops,
which is perfectly correlated with that.
Link with diabetes, obesity, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease,
what is that? Pulmonary edema, adrenal insufficiency,
hypothyroidism,
Alzheimer's disease,
and what is it?
Am
how do you say that? Amniotropic
lateral sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Prion's disease, lupus,
mitochondrial
disease, non Hodgkin's lymphoma,
neural tube defects, infertility, hypertension, glaucoma,
osteoporosis,
fatty liver disease, kidney failure, the correlation between
together the correlation data together with the direct
bio,
biological
evidence
make a compelling case for glyphosate action as
a glycine analog to account for much of
its toxicity.
2016.
The first long term study, 08/2016,
that confirms the world's most popular pesticide is
wiping bees off the planet.
This one's twenty sixteen September. Another shocking study
finds glyphosate present in childhood vaccines.
Here's the study. All of them are included.
I just think some of these are more
powerful than others. 2016,
micro Microbe InnoTech Laboratories Inc. They literally tested
this in a laboratory and compared it and
showed that they were in these it's it's
can't be more clear, guys. Here's another one
from twenty sixteen September, lots of glyphosate found
in most vaccines. Now, that's not necessarily the
case today. I'd argue it's probably still predominantly
the problem, but a lot has changed since
2016.
Glyphosate contaminates
contaminates in processed brand name foods.
2017.
You can go through the list. It's only
it's way worse today. It's this again, the
point is it's everywhere. It's in everything.
But you can look and it's in all
these brand name I mean, I mean, I
shouldn't say that, you know the problem is
even organic foods and stuff is questionable because
of the way they've done this, guys. That's
what's so messed up about this.
But at very least, you should try to
avoid,
you know, things that are not. But here
and that's why you should grow your own
if it's possible. It's the study that goes
over all of this glyphosate on basically every
single piece of food you could find.
Monsanto's
glyphosate linked to major ocean and coral reef
die offs,
June 2017.
Another study shows how glyphosate and aluminum
can operate synergistically to destroy the human brain.
So it's funny how you could point to
that. Now she's over here years later going,
but look at this, glyphosate's also working working
synergistically with this new COVID shot to destroy
your body. So maybe glyphosate is some kind
of primer. I mean, these are all just
thoughts that we should be having because it
is a deadly thing.
It's been clear for a very long time,
2015,
aluminum and glyphosate can synergistically
induce pineal gland pathology,
connection to gut, what is it, dysbiosis and
neurological disease.
This is a major study from 2014, it
looks like. 2015 published Agricultural Sciences.
2018,
Whitney Webb. New study finds links between Roundup,
glyphosate, herbicide, and fetal defects.
This is the study. Pre, perinatal exposure to
a glyphosate based herbicide impairs female reproductive outcomes
and induces second generation adverse effects. And you'd
think that would change something. Right?
Hold on. What was it? Oh, it was
this one.
You'd think it would change something. Right?
But you could have stuff like this. I
just feel like this is crazy how clear
the this and the study is just as
clear. It's just it's a headline from today.
But twenty twenty three,
exposure to PFAS
can reduce women's fertility by forty percent.
That's not even the newest one. There's plenty
of them that make the same allegation, but
yet that doesn't matter, apparently. You see, there's
that's there's a clear disconnect between what we
know and whether they care or do something
about it. It. That's the point, because these
have been there forever, and the reality is
they know this stuff and don't care. 2018,
weed killing carcinogen, glyphosate found in children's foods.
But again, it's damn near every one of
them. This one, 2019, glyphosate worse than we
could imagine.
It's everywhere.
This is when this was starting to sink
in, and the studies show it. It's in
everything.
Stephanie Sineff, Danny Rancu, the the overlap to
the COVID nineteen time frame. MRNA spike proteins,
all coming together.
This one is a larger one from, Derek
in 2023.
Mexico battles US government and mon and mister
Monsanto
to protect food sovereignty. Now, actually, I should
grab this one too. He recently did an
article about this, and this is actually the
kind of the point.
Oh, I think that's the that's the newer
one.
Let me see.
Yeah. This is the newer one. Oh, no.
This is 2424.
I thought I had a new one. Let
me do this real
quick. See if it will pops up because
Derek recently had another article about this, and
I I wanna include it if I can.
That that basically the bottom line is the
United States government is trying to force the
the the Mexican government to take their their
disgusting GMO corn. And they're for they're trying
to legally force them, and they're going, no.
We don't want we don't want that because
they've got all of these different,
heirloom
corn corn,
species.
What's the word I'm looking for? Not brands.
That's got stuck in my head.
Very very,
cheese. Different types of corn.
And they're just trying to force it in
there, and I think there's an obvious reason
for that.
Oh, what did I oh, there it is.
So this one
yeah. I think this is the one. So
mister Biden administration and mister Monsanto continue to
pull New Mexico into yeah. That is the
one. And accepting their GMO corn. So this
is just the extension of the story. This
one goes back
to 2023, and he followed us up in
2024. And they're just still trying to force
it on regardless.
2023.
Yet another study links lower sperm count with
pesticides
in general.
And this one's important in a large sense,
2016, but it goes over a lot of
stuff. And you'll find a lot of these
old links just deleted and shows removed. But
the complete history of Monsanto, the word the
quote, the world's most evil corporation, which is
pretty much the general consensus as it was
taken back then.
Now here is a snother study about that.
Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate, and the deterioration of
health in The United States, 2014.
I mean, just really, how many times can
we understand what's going on before we do
something about it?
Now Thomas Massie
came out. And like I was just saying,
maybe he sees that we care. Maybe he
actually believes it. Based on his track record
so far, it seems like he believes it.
He says, this week, I will introduce the
No Immunity for Glyphosate Act. This is why
Trump hates him. To undo the recent executive
order which promotes glyphosate round up and ins
insulates
manufacturers from liability. That is the part that
was a step too far for me. If
you could argue that made it say but
you're literally shielding by Bayer from I mean,
there's tons of lawsuits that are still going
at them, and now you're shielding them from
liability? Trump's literally protecting the company?
That isn't that fascism? Is that socialism? In
both? Yes.
But so he's doing this to push back.
Good. I support it. Whether or not you
support Massey, whether or not he's genuine, I
support the act because this is what I
believe.
That's how you do that. And, peep I
I believe that you're gonna get a lot
more young politicians to start doing the same
because it is showing look. People clearly gravitate
towards it.
Now,
lastly, to bring this all together, I mean,
I found this insane, the connection, like the
timing of it all, which
maybe it's not an accident, guys.
On on February 5,
it was discussed that Israel
used glyphosate
on the border of Lebanon
as as it basically
arguably well, first of all, support to highlight
that they use glyphosate legitimately as it reads
right here as a like a deep like
a to like an or to kill
plants. So whatever because the whole point is
the reason these things don't die is because
they have a genetically modified thing in them
that stops them from being hurt by this.
So they use these things as a detriment,
and that's going in your body, guys.
And so they use this, or they claim
they were gonna use a nontoxic thing to
spray, and then they dumped dangerously high glyphosate.
So as DropSiteNews writes, Israeli aircraft sprayed chemical
substances over areas along the blue line, which
is the demarcation line. I mean, Israel's been
violating their supposed ceasefire there forever. They're illegally
occupying
Lebanon. It says which Lebanon's ministries of agriculture
and environment confirmed included
glyphosate at concentrations
20 to 30 times higher than normal levels.
This is how they use all this stuff.
It's how they use Agent Orange. They always
claim, oh, it's an herbicide
or dioxins for that matter.
The ministry said that spraying that spraying constitutes
a hostile act and a grave violation of
their sovereignty. Well, so too does illegally occupying
their territory. The governments don't care. Warning of
severe damage to vegetation, soil fertility, agricultural production,
water sources, long term public health.
Think about this right as we're dealing with
this now over here. They're going, they just
tried to poison and damage us, and you're
putting this in your body. Glyphosate is commonly
used in military vegetation clearing operations. It is.
Along borders to kill crops,
grass, cover crown cover, strip concealment,
create exposed buffer zones, damage agricultural livelihoods, and
discourage civilian presence in return.
Yeah. And you're pointing that in your body
and Trump just told you it's gonna go
on all your food. And it already is,
by the way. Lebanese authorities warn that its
use in this toxic in this context
threatens food security and long term environmental stability.
Trump wants you to believe it's going to
increase your food production. I mean, think about
how weird this is. I don't think it's
an accident, guys. I think there's something to
this. But just realize that overall, this is
something that is dangerous, that is damaging,
no matter how whether it's 30 times or
just as it is.
Unifil,
The U the United Nations said it was
informed in advance about this, calling it a
nontoxic chemical
that would be dropped.
Forcing peacekeepers to suspend operations for more than
nine hours across roughly one third of their
area. They probably did something with that opportunity.
Unifil called the action unacceptable and a violation
of UN Security Council 17 o one, but
nobody cares because it only matters when your
enemies do that. Israel and United States can
say they violated the UN agreement, but then
completely ignore it in every possible way they
want to.
To. Not a secret. Everyone watches it. It
happens every day. It just shows you where
we actually are, guys.
Look at this. They're spraying this to curt,
to kill,
to remove.
So
this is the UN post. Yesterday morning, the
they told us they were gonna post a
nontoxic
chemical.
And they go on to make it clear
that ultimately they're you know, what we're talking
about. It appears the nontoxic chemical Israel dropped
to Lebanon was a very high concentration of
glyphosate, and that was February 4.
Okay.
Cancer research linked to the WHO
classifies it as a probable carcinogen. Well, this
is always how it works. It ends up
probable carcinogen,
and it just stays there forever. It is
carcinogenic. Study after study after study has shown
that.
Then check this out. Okay. The next day.
So the sixth, we're talking about it. Or
the fourth, six, so day and a half,
two days later.
According to local sources, Israeli settlers sprayed chemical
pesticides on crops in several areas. This is
the same place, guys. Destroying their crops. Take
a look at this.
That's what they did.
Now, of course, you could argue that they
sprayed something other than glyphosate. You could argue
they sprayed something in addition to glyphosate, which
honestly wouldn't surprise me. But what appears to
what we're finding out from the UN is
they sprayed glyphosate.
In an or in order to poison them,
in order to hurt them, and that's what's
on the ground.
And that's the next day. And as she
writes, that's slow genocide. Right?
Now think about this. You basically, a couple
of weeks later, Trump rules out in in
a national order
to make sure glyphosate is a national security
imperative. Doesn't that seem weird?
Even if it's not dangerous at all, you're
you're being told to use it as a
weapon, and then he rolls it out as
a national security defense imperative? That seems weird.
And also makes you wonder whether or not
there's some kind of connection to what Israel
and the rest of them are doing. That
could be nothing, though. My main point in
all of this I'm just hap I'm just
discussing the possibilities. My main point is that
there Trump is violating the agreement
with his own people.
Maha and everybody else in this country was
pretty adamantly rolling back glyphosate. At least we
were being told that. He comes out and
just jams it forward.
Don't know how you misunderstand that. Now I'll
leave you with a few more points here
in a in a more broad sense. Here's
a show we did discussed, r RNAi,
Gene Silencing Pesticides.
That's a part of this conversation, and vaccines
and their potential role in the COVID nineteen
illusion.
We talked about the obligatory pesticide spraying in
New York City, GM mosquitoes and flying vaccinators.
Now they're all connected. Now the pesticide side
of this is the same conversation, guys.
If you don't know why, watch the show.
It it gets into the overlap, the pesticides,
herbicide, the way that they're used in similar
ways, endocrine disrupting
chemicals. Now let's include the conversation of dioxins
because it feels relevant. In the same way
this is being abused, this this conversation overlaps
the the Conyers, Georgia conversation, the the, East
Palestine conversation, and how what we're talking about
is a clear, as I wrote, murder by
mal murder by malfeasance.
Dioxin contamination and the ongoing cover up, it's
the same conversation of glyphosate,
maybe used and applied a different way, both
used as weapons, both essentially being allowed to
become ubiquitous in your life despite the damage,
and then profiting from that.
Every possible way. All of these, by the
way, all of them, are provably endocrine disrupting
chemicals. All of them. Every does every pesticide
they don't have to be, by the way.
Just so happens to be all the ones
they use.
Every part of your life, they're dumping this
stuff in your face, and it's hurting you.
And your family, and your animals, your crops.
It's all very clear. Facts don't matter today,
though.
I had an interview with doctor Peter McCullough
about this as well, and we discussed both
the COVID nineteen injection as being one of
those things.
And I'll leave you with the article from
Derek Bros from 2023.
Five ways your health is under attack, and
how to protect yourself. Because, obviously, it's super
important that we remember that there are solutions
here.
Right? That we need to be taking a
I don't wanna start advocating and promoting, you
know, take this to take this out of
your body. You guys know where to look.
This and and it's hard to know for
sure what's gonna work the best and who's
a scam, but use discernment.
But whether we're talking about heavy metals or
NanoDek or whatever else, there are possible things
to do to help clean your body and
and to and keep protect your to protect
yourself from these things. But the simple things
as always, you know, filter use RO water
if you can. Otherwise, some kind of, you
know, Berkey Berkey would at least get you
some way there, filter it. You know, have
organic food, grow your own crops. Do your
best to keep yourself
safe from these things. You know that they
exist, and they are not healthy for you.
So it's either taking the choice to sort
of insulate and protect yourself from it, or
just to put your head in the sand.
Now, an an addition to the immediate actions
of your own body, we need to stand
up and do something to drive this back
the other direction, executive order or not. An
executive order is just a piece of paper
that Trump wrote. It ultimately has no power
unless they force it in because that applies
to a hell of a lot more than
the executive branch, guys. So it's illegitimate in
its own right, but they will do it.
They've done it the whole time, but it's
up to us. Republican, conserve conservative, republican, liberal,
democrat, or the rest of us that realize
it's all ridiculous.
How about we all just stand up and
go, you know what though? We may hate
each other or this or that, but we
all don't want that.
It'd be really simple to recognize that. It'd
be really simple to just take a stand
against something that we all agree on. And
it seems like there's plenty of those things
if we stop letting the partisanship divide us.
So thank you for tuning in today, guys.
I appreciate you all.
Our platform needs your support. So the more
you can do, the more we'll continue to
put out. Derek has some more stuff coming
up soon. I've got an article from Robert
I'm putting out tomorrow as well as the
interview I'm trying to put out tomorrow. Unless
something happens, I'll put it off one more
day and do a show.
And
there are some more there there is a
project, coming,
that I've I've been hesitant to point out
just because I didn't wanna pronounce announce it
before it gets too close. But we're kind
of in the mid in the midst right
now of choosing a name and and a
new show coming. It involves Derek Whitney, myself.
There's there's some fun things coming your way.
So
look forward to that. Thank you for all
of your support.
We exist because of you. I love you
all. As always, question everything. Come to your
own conclusions. Stay vigilant.